The use of aluminum and other metal cans has greatly increased within the last forty years worldwide, particularly for canned foods and juices, milk, soft drinks, and beer. The employment of thinner aluminum and other metals in the manufacture of these cans has met with considerable success and the employment of aluminum has enabled every manufacturer of cans to provide an easy opening tab at one end thereof which may be easily manipulated to form an opening in the can and making it easier to crush and recycle. Also, for shipping purposes, all cans are now required to be much lighter than the older cans to keep shipping costs down. The employment of aluminum and other metals in the manufacture of cans has increased the cost of manufacture due to the increasing cost of these materials over time as well. Therefore, recycling of empty cans is an established element of commerce which not only enables more efficient allocation of these natural resources, but it also benefits the environment by removing cans from beaches, campsites, and the highways and byways by providing free enterprise an incentive to recycle because of the inherent industrial value of these raw materials worldwide.
Many prior art devices exist that crush empty cans “in doors”, such as in restaurants, bars and in homes. None however have yet been improved to capitalize on new technologies such as lighter and stronger materials, and light and powerful lithium ion batteries to crush cans in the “out doors”, or in trucks, cars, planes, trains, etc. Truckers, campers and hikers simply pack trash bags, or use campsite or other trash facilities to dispose of their cans. Nor has any invention in the prior art dealt with the productivity problem of transporting bulky “non-crushed cans” to sites where the cans are crushed in bulk. Historically, the focus has been on crushing the cans in the most efficient way possible in terms of cost and manpower so that can remnants take up less space in a garbage bag or a box until the cans are disposed of permanently, generally in a landfill. However, in recent years widespread concern about the environment has led to the enactment of popularly called “bottle bills” which require manufacturers of soft drinks and beer to charge a deposit on cans as well as other beverage containers such as bottles, so as to encourage the purchasers to return the empty containers to the store rather than discard these containers at the expense of the environment. The “trash problem” is especially bad in fast growing places around the globe like Southeast Asia, where the trash from their beaches reach the North Pacific coast of the United States and elsewhere. Parallel to this method of encouraging recycling of cans, recycling centers have become part of every day life in almost every community where metal cans are used in commerce. A need exists for a light weight apparatus and method by which all metal cans can be crushed quickly at the “point of collection”, anywhere, to enhance the productivity and incentive for private handling, storage and transport of metal containers.
Return deposits and cash paid per pound for recycled aluminum and other metals at worldwide recycling centers encourage the world's population in general to avoid littering and to make an effort to deposit these materials into the trash which eventually winds up in solid waste disposal systems including landfills. Both the recycle and “return deposit” methods assist in the preservation of natural resources by encouraging manufacturers of beverage containers to reuse containers or to recycle these materials. Beverage containers, especially aluminum beverage containers, are frequently discarded in public places, which are “out doors”. Higher productivity in the ease of transport and storage of such materials would provide further incentive to encourage governments, individuals and private enterprise to collect cans from public places, campsites and landfills, including the streets, highways and parks.
The so-called “bottle bills” have caused a number of storage and transportation problems. For example, empty cans take up an unreasonable amount of space in handling and shipping. The expanded space requirements of storage and handling of these cans creates inconveniences and substantial overhead expenses which in many cases nullify the recycle value. Unlike bottles which may be sterilized and refilled, empty cans must eventually be crushed and their component materials recycled. It is desirable, since cans are safer, more compact, lighter and easier to store when crushed, to further encourage the use of cans by providing improved devices and methods for “out door” uses which can fold and crush these empty cans at the “point of collection” so that their volume density takes up a fraction of their previous occupied space before transport. Merely crushing the cans, however, in a conventional fashion simply will not suffice. Many states have no statutory deposit requirements, and yet the bottlers use essentially the same designs on their cans across state lines. To avoid fraud, therefore, the cans must be identifiable as deposit cans. Furthermore, the trademark on the side of the can must be identifiable so that the can will be returned to the proper supplier. Once cans have been crushed by various prior art crushing devices which flatten the cans in a plane through the longitudinal axis, the written material on the sides of the cans are unreadable. In other aspects the faces, i.e., the circular end face of the can, generally contain the deposit information on the upper face. Most can crushing operations squeeze the two end faces of the can toward each other. This is just as unsatisfactory for purposes of the “bottle bill” concept because, after the operation is complete, the cylindrical wall is entirely obscured, and identification of the source is impossible.
Other prior art devices have provided crushed cans while preserving the relevant printed material. In these crushers, the can is creased at the center of the cylindrical wall either prior to or during the crushing operation. However, in most of the embodiments disclosed, two separate manual operations are required, the first to crease the can and the second to complete the fold of the can. In other embodiments the creasing element is never fully retracted during the crushing operation and thus the printed matter on the end faces of the can is partly obstructed.
Several references exist which describe apparatus for laterally crushing cans as opposed to crushing in an end to end matter. In this regard U.S. Pat. No. 3,832,941, issued to Bynumw Moller and U.S. Pat. No. 4,291,618, issued to Warren R. Heiser et al. present apparatus and methodology for crushing cans by first laterally compressing the central portion of the can to inwardly tilt the can's opposite ends, and then further flattening the can by further tilting the can ends until they lie in generally the same plane and parallel to the flattened can body. In this regard the can crushing sequence of the Moller reference provides a center crushing element which is pushed through a slot in a stationary plate to laterally flatten the center portion of the can against a movable plate. The crushing element is then withdrawn and the movable plate is moved to flatten the can against the stationary plate. The flattened can is then dropped through a slot thus removing the can from the apparatus. A similar crushing sequence is presented in the Heiser et al. reference where a plunger is moved forward through a slot in a movable plate to crush a central portion of a can. The plunger is then withdrawn and the movable plate is moved to complete the lateral crushing of the can which is then dropped through an opening.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,121,685, issued to Turner in June 1992 solved many of the problems inherent in the prior art and satisfied the need at that time for an improved can crushing apparatus for use “in doors” (i.e. in the home, commercial establishments, and the like). Turner was fully automated and possessed “safety” features, while providing a can crusher wherein the moving plates defined unilateral motion. Turner was special because it avoided moving the plates in opposite directions, thus contributing to a more efficient process requiring less power than its predecessors. As a result, Turner was capable of being downsized for safe general use “in doors”. However, Turner was slow in operation and too big and heavy to carry around for general use “out doors”.
A need now exists for an improved, more efficient, can crushing apparatus to further incentivize recycling for use at the “point of collection”, whether it is “out doors” in nature, or in a truck, car, plane or boat; or even “in doors” such as in the home and in commercial establishments. In short, a portable electric can crusher is needed, and to be effective, it must be light enough to carry around by hand or within a back pack, and powerful enough to crush any can, anywhere. Such a need can be served by an apparatus which is fully automated for crushing cans along with possessing safety features like Turner, and which also provides a light but powerful crushing capability to get more cans recycled per unit time. In another aspect an apparatus is needed which can provide a can crushing capability for high volume use, anywhere, even at a landfill. Thus, one of the many objects of the invention is to provide a portable electric can crusher which may be of such simple and light construction that it is easy to carry so as to be economically feasible, long lasting and relatively trouble free in operation, and so that the enhanced productivity of such an improved device will be a further incentive to recycle.